Watching the replay of that overtime goal over and over, all I can say is wow... What luck, bounces off 2 sticks then redirects off a leg and goes in, could they have gotten any more lucky? Short answer, no.

I know, hard to lose on a goal like that. But, strangely it was more tolerable to lose that way than it was to lose on a BS penalty, or a bad missed call (I know there were missed calls but not immediately before the goal as I recall), or someone blowing their coverage, etc.

It would have been worse had we been a favored team and lost like that.

Out of the 3 losses so far, game 4 is the easiest one to swallow in my opinion, even though we blew a 2-goal lead.

U GUYS ARE FUKIN ANYOING IM GONNA COME DOWN THERE AND KILL ALL YALL THE ONLY THING THAT SAVED UR TEAM WAS OSGOOD AND OSSGOOD SUKS 2 JUST LIKE UR WHOLE FUKIN TEAM I HOPE U HEARD THIS AND THINK CAUSE ALL I GOT TO SAY TO U IS UR A BUNCH OF FUKIN IDIOTS BARONS A HOOSER CUSE HE WENT TO UR TEAM AND I HOPE U GUYS SHOULD SEND UR TEAM TO ANOTHER CITY CAUSE U GUYS ARE A BUNCH OF FUKIN WHINERS GO CANUCKS GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! --- A canucks fan on stltoday.com

Watching the replay of that overtime goal over and over, all I can say is wow... What luck, bounces off 2 sticks then redirects off a leg and goes in, could they have gotten any more lucky? Short answer, no.

Well, we do give up a lot of shots from the point. And Boston had the puck most of the overtime. They earned their luck.

Watching the replay of that overtime goal over and over, all I can say is wow... What luck, bounces off 2 sticks then redirects off a leg and goes in, could they have gotten any more lucky? Short answer, no.

To be fair, they owned OT. If it hadn't been an insanely "lucky" couple of bouncees (I don't necessarily believe in puck luck), it would've been a straight-up skill play, probably. For me, there was definitely a feeling of inevitability, of impending doom.

"If I were to wish for anything, I should not wish for wealth and power, but for the passionate sense of the potential, for the eye which, ever young and ardent, sees the possible. Pleasure disappoints, possibility never. And what wine is so sparkling, what so fragrant, what so intoxicating, as possibility!" - Kierkegaard

this is one of our offences worst match ups. Small and skilled against Big teams. We can't use the middle of the ice against them. For our top line to really get going franzen has to clear space by going up the middle and driving the net but he won't. We have guys like Abdelkader and Helm that are willing but don't have the same size and strength of the bruins.

Holland needs to add a couple of big wingers throughout the line up. Tatar and Nyquist are great and all but you can't have too many small guys in the top 6. Nyquist would get us a lot probably more then tatar and i can see tatar being more effective against bigger opponents as he develops. tatar had his nose all around the net and was winning puck battles. Nyquist tries to go to the dirty areas but was way too weak on the puck. more often then not when the puck hit nyquists stick it was going back to a bruins player

this is one of our offences worst match ups. Small and skilled against Big teams. We can't use the middle of the ice against them. For our top line to really get going franzen has to clear space by going up the middle and driving the net but he won't. We have guys like Abdelkader and Helm that are willing but don't have the same size and strength of the bruins.

Holland needs to add a couple of big wingers throughout the line up. Tatar and Nyquist are great and all but you can't have too many small guys in the top 6. Nyquist would get us a lot probably more then tatar and i can see tatar being more effective against bigger opponents as he develops. tatar had his nose all around the net and was winning puck battles. Nyquist tries to go to the dirty areas but was way too weak on the puck. more often then not when the puck hit nyquists stick it was going back to a bruins player

I dunno, I'm not really buying it. I mean, sure, we do have to get bigger up front. But boiling this series down to "The big fish eats the little one" rings hollow to me. If small and speedy can't beat the Bruins, why do the Habs give them fits?

"If I were to wish for anything, I should not wish for wealth and power, but for the passionate sense of the potential, for the eye which, ever young and ardent, sees the possible. Pleasure disappoints, possibility never. And what wine is so sparkling, what so fragrant, what so intoxicating, as possibility!" - Kierkegaard

I dunno, I'm not really buying it. I mean, sure, we do have to get bigger up front. But boiling this series down to "The big fish eats the little one" rings hollow to me. If small and speedy can't beat the Bruins, why do the Habs give them fits?

habs gave them fits in the regular season, as did we....i don't see mtl beating boston.

If you look at Game 1 and the first period of Game 4, we were more than holding our own. Was it because we were crashing the net and crushing them in their corners? Not at all. What we were doing was playing a quick, efficient transition game. We didn't mess around in our end. As soon as we regained possession in our zone, we were pushing up the ice, transitioning from defense to offense like *snap* that. For the most part, we haven't done that. We've given them free time in our zone because we want everything to be pretty and perfect and because our forwards aren't consistently making themselves available for breakout passes.

Puck possession and management on our half of the ice (including half of the neutral zone). This is where we really miss Lidstrom and Rafalski. It's not just that they were great at defending in their zone. They were possession monsters. If they had the puck, the entire opposing unit backed off, because they knew something was coming, somehow, some way. Lidstrom and Rafalski made brilliant first-passes, drove our possession and attack. They made plays. They made things happened. They generated. They dictated. They owned the puck, we owned the ice.

That's why the Bruins are trying to throw Smith off his game. We're counting on him to drive possession, because the numbers and even the simple eye test say he can be that kind of player for us. Unfortunately, he's also young and jumpy and he makes mistakes. Get him off his game and you cripple our attack.

"If I were to wish for anything, I should not wish for wealth and power, but for the passionate sense of the potential, for the eye which, ever young and ardent, sees the possible. Pleasure disappoints, possibility never. And what wine is so sparkling, what so fragrant, what so intoxicating, as possibility!" - Kierkegaard

habs gave them fits in the regular season, as did we....i don't see mtl beating boston.

My point is that speed is how you beat the Bruins. Doesn't mean you're going to beat them. It's just the one matchup they tend to struggle with. Their own fans and pundits say so.

"If I were to wish for anything, I should not wish for wealth and power, but for the passionate sense of the potential, for the eye which, ever young and ardent, sees the possible. Pleasure disappoints, possibility never. And what wine is so sparkling, what so fragrant, what so intoxicating, as possibility!" - Kierkegaard

It's tough to play 60 minutes against a team finishing their checks and forechecking hard. Some guys looked like they just wanted to hide out on the ice nobody wanted the puck once the bruins ramped it up

My point is that speed is how you beat the Bruins. Doesn't mean you're going to beat them. It's just the one matchup they tend to struggle with. Their own fans and pundits say so.

Speed takes effort, and the Bs are very good at grinding you down. There's a reason you don't see many teams go at them full throttle for a full 60 minutes. I'm not sure I'd say it's impossible -- but it's definitely not easy. And when you start to catch your breath, that's when they start tightening the vice.

One last thought....Jimmy Howard doesn't feel well after the pre-game warm-ups and therefore doesn't play???? All I can say it that's freakin WEAK. I don't know the extent of his symptoms or what he was going through, BUT I do know what other players have played through to be a part of such big games at playoff time. I think the way it went down without any major sign of ailment previous to the warm-ups just leaves me to wonder. WOW. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt as I am not fully informed on the situation, but I still think it's a bit weak. This starts to raise a lot, lot, of questions.

Do you really want your goalie to play injured? If we're talking about a 4th line grinder then yeah, rub some dirt on it and get out there. I've been sticking up for the guy around here, but if he's really hurting (whether ill or injured), I want him on the bench. Put it differently, he wouldn't be doing anyone any favors if he insisted on playing if he were physically unable to perform at or near his best. If he did insist on starting, I'd probably be the first in line to criticize him for being selfish.

Monster's in net for Saturday, so be it. He'll give the guys a chance. It's up to the other 18 guys to try and take it..